Under what conditions would you support bailouts?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Poll question: Under what conditions would you support bailouts?

Feel free to suggest other options.

[polichick]

1. If we're talking about the auto companies, I'd say all three.

[navarth]

2. they're all tempting options but the situation is WAY too complicated

to be dealt with this way.

[flyingobject]

3. bailouts worthless if they don't create jobs

our economy is in tatters because of the huge loss of jobs that these finance companies,
banks and insurance have sent to other countries.

[sendero]

22. The bailouts will be worthless..

.. if there isn't a long term survival strategy for the companies.

Hiring higher-paid workers is not a long term survival strategy, no matter how much we wish it would be.

[Frustratedlady]

4. Absolutely no bonuses until debt paid back.

Why aren't the banks lending? Isn't that why they got the bailouts?

Paulson should be replaced. He's like a fart in a skillet.

[Donnachaidh]

5. you forgot ALL of the Above n/t

[doc03]

6. None of your options are practical.

1.I don't think the auto companies are in trouble because of bad management this time. All the auto sales are down including Toyota and Honda.
2.If you nationalize the industry you would have cars like the Yugo.
3.If all the parts were made in the USA you couldn't afford the car.

I support the bailout because it saves 3 million jobs.

[Vincardog]

7. I do think the auto companies are in trouble because of bad management this time.

the management of American Auto companies have been blind to the public will,
deaf to our cries and
created dumb products.

We should nationalize the companies. Fire every BOD and executive who can not demonstrate concrete dedication to building quality products and
paying a LIVING wage to all employees.

[doc03]

8. If that's the case why are Toyota and Honda sales

down just as much as the American companies? The quality of American cars has vastly improved. The quality of the American cars are better on average that most all European brands and is close to and in some cases better than the Asian brands. In either 2006 or 2007 Consumer Reports didn't recommend even one Mercedes product. The big three don't pay a living wage today? Do want to drive a Yugo? That's what you would get from a nationalized industry. I think that was tried by the USSR and it didn't work out that well..

[Vincardog]

11. Because if you lay off enough people you don't have anyone left to buy any products.

Where are the links to prove your assertions?
Who says american badge autos are of such great quality?
My Ford transmission broke every 3 years
My VW ran 250,000 Miles and 15 years without a problem.
Who said anything about Mercedes other than you?
What do you propose?

[doc03]

15. If you lay off enough people you don't

have anyone left to buy any products? What the hell are you talking about? Who said anything about laying people off? That is my point though if you don't help out the Big 3 there will be 3 million people laid off and we will be in the Great Depression II. I am not going to waste my time looking up links for you, you are obviously totally misinformed or your mind is closed about the quality of American cars. You said American cars are such poor quality so I brought up the fact that Consumer Reports didn't recommend one Mercedes product. You brag about your VW and VW is a company that has had very bad quality records for several years now. If you want to know about quality research it yourself buy a Consumer Reports Annual Auto Issue, you will find all the European brands have quality problems and I'm talking even luxury vehicles such as BMW, Volvo and Jaguar and all the rest. The one European car that seems to do fairly well is the Mini Cooper. The Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan and Lincoln MKZ models rate right up with the best of the Japanese products.

oh I forgot: I have been driving 44 years now and have owned American, European and Japanese cars. I had one transmission go out and guess what it was a Ford and the transmission was made by guess who? Mitsubishi

[AndyTiedye]

9. Big 3 Management Believed There Would Be Lots of Cheap Oil From Iraq

I think the management of the big 3 were in the "Energy Task Force" meetings and were
tipped off at that time that Bush** was going to invade Iraq and take their oil.
The buzz at that time was that oil was going to drop to $28/barrel, and they made their plans accordingly.
GM shut down the whole EV program and came out with new lines of huge gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks
like the Hummer. Ford went ahead with the Escape Hybrid, but did not put that hybrid power plant into
any other vehicles. They shifted their development resources into the big guzzlers as well.

[doc03]

10. The same goes for the Asian and European companies

they made big vehicles too. Take Toyota for example, they outdone GM, Ford and Chrysler with their Tundra pickup. The Camry was a sub-compact originally now it's huge and the smaller Corolla is even bigger now than the Camry was originally. The Honda Accord when first introduced to the USA had 68 HP, today's Accord has 268 hp. I remember several years ago Toyota said they would make all their models in a Hybrid by 2010 I believe so far they only have the Prius and the Camry.

[AndyTiedye]

13. Those Companies Have a More Diverse Lineup

Every automaker makes big vehicles that guzzle gas, but the big 3 have been focused on those.

The fact that their most fuel-efficient vehicle is an SUV tells us something.

[doc03]

14. Their most fuel efficient vehicle is an SUV??????

[AndyTiedye]

17. None of Their "Economy" Cars Can Beat the Ford Escape Hybrid SUV

[doc03]

18. From Ford site Focus 35 MPG hwy

that's about the same as the Corolla or the Civic gas model. The Escape Hybrid gets 34 MPG hwy but only has a 1000 lb. towing capacity hardly a SUV in my opinion. Ford makes more fuel efficient diesel cars in Europe but EPA regulations prevent them from selling them here. The same goes for the Mini Cooper diesel. VW makes a Jetta diesel that on the surface looks attractive but VW has serious quality problems. As far as fuel efficient hybrids Toyota makes the Prius and Honda makes a hybrid Civic. Toyota makes a hybrid Camry and GM makes a comparable hybrid Malibu. Hybrids make sense when gas is $4.00 a gallon but now with gas at less than $2.00 they aren't cost effective. If gas stays below $2.00 the American people will demand even bigger SUV's, Americans have very short memories. The auto companies wouldn't have been making big SUVs if people didn't want them. The only reason Toyota makes the Prius is to bring down their average fuel numbers so they can sell their huge pickups and SUVs. Look at the Toyota line up and and show me where they have been doing any different than the Big 3. An example compare the first Camry to today's or the first Accord to today's..

[stillcool]

12. Why can't they just close..

a couple of the plants in the 35 countries they operate in? Like maybe this one:

http://www.rediff.com/money/2008/dec/01gm-to-make-india-asia-pacific-hub-for-power-trains.htm

GM to make India Asia-Pacific hub for power-trains

December 01, 2008 14:42 IST

Unperturbed by the Mumbai terror attacks and its ongoing struggle to avoid bankruptcy back home, US auto major General Motors said on Monday it is making India power-trains development hub for Asia-Pacific region.

The company's Indian subsidiary General Motors India has already announced a total of $500 million investments in the country to set up new car and power-train manufacturing facilities and it will be hiring 500 people in the second-half of next year.
"With our engineering facility in Bangalore as the foundation of our business in India, we are making the country the development hub of power-trains for Asia-Pacific region," GMI president and managing director Karl Slym told PTI.

Considering the fact that the hub will cover countries like Australia, China, Korea, choosing India as the location is a significant decision, he added.

[doc03]

16. If their wasn't a Union involved in the mess

the money would have just been handed over with no conditions.

[barb162]

19. The last two items are equally important.

[GliderGuider]

20. Under no conditions

By the time this depression is fully underway in two or three years we'll be looking at over 30% unemployment in every industrialized nation in the world -- basically on a par with the current situation in Africa. That could result in the US economy shedding jobs at the rate of one to two million a month, for a number of years. Compared to the final toll of such a scenario (potentially over 50 million unemployed), a couple of million unemployed auto workers are a sneeze in a windstorm.

If saving the jobs of a couple of million people would turn back the tide of depression, I'd be all for it. In our current situation, however, it will at most delay the inevitable tsunami by a quarter or two. I'm as against bailing out the auto industry as I'm against bailing out the banking industry. And as a victim of the 2000/2001 tech wreck, I know what it feels like to lose one's job when a bubble bursts. Retrenchment was was the right thing for the high tech industry to do, and it's the right thing for the auto industry.

You would be much further ahead putting the taxpayers' money into a combination of unemployment insurance, universal health care and public works projects.

Sorry, I do not support an auto industry bail-out.

[notesdev]

21. Seconded

Private profits socialized risk is bullshit. "I win - you lose: pick one". If money must be spent, spend it, but don't just give it to the same people who caused the problem in the first place.